Uhh, this is kinda weird.

The burn meter set to Sedentary says that I burn about 2150 by doing nothing. My recommended caloric intake is 1200. That means I have a deficit of 950. (2150-1200) If I only need to burn 500 more than I eat per day to lose 2 lbs per week, then doesn't my calorie deficit imply that I don't even need to exercise in order to lose weight?

If not, how many calories should I burn each day by exercising?

(Note: I know that exercise is good for me, I just want to know if exercising would actually be dangerous since my deficit is already so high without exercising at all.)

You've chosen the sedentary setting, which means little to no exercise.  So yes, it's calculating your deficit without accounting for exercise. 

You can either recalculate your intake at a different activity level, or you can "eat back" the calories you burn through exercise.  In other words, if you burn 200 calories exercising, eat an extra 200 calories that day.

No, 500 deficit per day is one pound a week, not two. 500 x 7 = 3500. 3500 calories = one pound. 2 pounds loss per week is 7000 calories, meaning a 1000 deficit per day.

You need to have a deficit of 1000 calories a day to lose 2 pounds a week, and you are just under that. So your 950 calorie deficit mean that you can lose 1.9 pounds a week just being sedentary. 1200 calories is not very much food though and it can be hard to meet your nutrition requirements. You might do better exercising and eating back whatever you burn, plus of course then you will have the health benefits of exercise. It's up to you how much you want to exercise, but the minimum recommended amount is 30 minutes of moderate cardio most days plus strength training at least 2 non-consecutive days a week. You're not supposed to have a deficit greater than 1000 calories though, so if your exercise pushes it farther than that you should eat them back.

I can say with near certainty, that if you don't incorporate an increase level of physical activity into your daily life for the rest of your life, you will never lose the weight and keep it off.  They human body is an exercise/endurance/activity machine.  Being sedentary is not a natural state and your body compensates for this unnatural state by shutting down your metabolism to burn less and less calories.   Activity raises your metabolism, causing you to lose weight faster and to keep it off forever, if you continue with your good eating habits and the exercise.   If you do take up the exercise, you would definitely have to eat more so that you maintain that same deficit.  1200 calories a day is not enough energy to fuel sustained workouts and you'll just end up getting tired and quitting.  

Original Post by johnnypenso:

I can say with near certainty, that if you don't incorporate an increase level of physical activity into your daily life for the rest of your life, you will never lose the weight and keep it off.  They human body is an exercise/endurance/activity machine.  Being sedentary is not a natural state and your body compensates for this unnatural state by shutting down your metabolism to burn less and less calories.   Activity raises your metabolism, causing you to lose weight faster and to keep it off forever, if you continue with your good eating habits and the exercise.   If you do take up the exercise, you would definitely have to eat more so that you maintain that same deficit.  1200 calories a day is not enough energy to fuel sustained workouts and you'll just end up getting tired and quitting.  

 If that's the case, I wonder how I've lost 60 pounds in 3 1/2 years and kept it off.  I can't exercise at all because of a weak heart (I'm under medical supervision), so I've done it all with diet.  It's been slow going, and I still have to lose 25 more pounds for a normal BMI, but I've found ways to make it stick.  I try for a 250 calorie deficit and a loss of 1/2 pound a week, so I'm able to eat 1400 calories and still lose.  I even lost while confined to bed for days and weeks.  Now that's really sedentary!

Yes, activity is important, but sometimes people just can't do enough exercise to make a difference.  We all find our own way on this journey.  Blanket statements like this are counterproductive.

The important thing is to find what works for you, don't be in a rush, and don't think of this as a temporary "diet."  Exercise is a very good way to allow yourself to eat more. 

I did say with "near" certainty Claire...there are exceptions to every rule and you are the exception to this rule.  In my own personal life I have seen dozens and dozens of people try to lose weight, and not a single one of them has been able to keep the weight off without incorporating an exercise routine or becoming more active.

"For example, data from the National Weight Control Registry (NWCR) support the idea that high levels of physical activity are critical to weight-loss success. The NWCR is a registry of over 6,000 individuals who have maintained a minimum 13.6 kg weight loss for at least 1 year; the average weight loss is 30.4 kg maintained for a mean duration of 5.5 years. NWCR members report expending an average of 2,682 kcal per week by means of physical activity, and nearly 90% report regular exercise.[60]"

>>The burn meter set to Sedentary says that I burn about 2150 by doing nothing. My recommended caloric intake is 1200. That means I have a deficit of 950.<<

isn't the question - why is her sedentary burn so high and recommended calorie intake so low? Why did CC set her at a 950 deficit?

So she is asking, with this deficit, does she even need to add exercise to lose weight?

Isn't the answer that she needs to have a 500-700 deficit, and up her intake to accomodate exercise if she wants to be trim and slim? Or leave out exercise, bump up to 1450 if she isn't exercising? (slim but not strong)

That is a fairly high sedentary burn isn't it?

Or have I missed this completely?

I agree with CDC - unless the OP set a goal date that was too close, I would think CC would default to a 1lb/week loss, and would have suggested an intake of 1650.

I just ran some numbers (although I used the CC calculator, and from dizzy's profile, she is 18, so needs to use the teen calculator), and got that she should eat 1650.

Dizzy - because you are 18, you should not eat less than 1500, and you should use the teen calculators (links are in the Weight Loss FAQ post stickied at the top, I believe).

Unfortunately, CC doesn't use 1 lb/week as its default value.  It assumes that people want to lose weight as fast as possible and, if you don't give it a target date, will usually just assign women 1200 cals/day (even when it's completely inappropriate - as in the original poster's case).  The algorithm really needs to be revisited.  A much better calculator for suggesting caloric intake can be found here: http://www.phord.com/cc/  It still doesn't work perfectly for teens, though, who should add 300 calories/day to what it calculates.

Thank you, everyone! :D Yeah, I thought 950 was REALLY high without exercise. I didn't think that 18 was still considered teenager for the calculators, but thank you, I'll check them out.

I went into the FAQs and the only calculator for teens that I could find was a link to a site that does it for people under 10. :/ I don't know where the teen calculator is in this case.

Also, I gave it a goal date set a year or more ahead.

edit, to everyone: Okay, this is the only thing I can think of to do. I changed my activity level to light (my activity level is between sedentary and light. I exercise regularly but the rest of the day I'm not as active.) and it gave me 1505 instead. That gives me a 650 deficit. Does that mean in order to lose 2lbs per week, I should just burn off 250/day through exercise and that would be safer? Is that what you guys are saying?

I personally don't like to rely too much on CC's activity levels estimations, because they can be tricky (I mean, if you exercise regularly but are sitting on your ass the rest of the day - you're not sedentary, you're definitely light and depending on the intensity of your workouts - maybe even moderately active). Every once in a while I'll calcute my activity level through recording all my activities for that day (when it's a regular day, not one where I exercise a ton) and base my calorie deficit on that. I've lost 35 pounds since March, so I'm probably doing something right.